The author describes the treatment in more detail when he talks about ending the rail strike.

The treatment is described. "To get the legislation he wanted,..." appears vague. However, the author doesn't go into detail about the Civil Rights Act. Turning legislation with a 74% disapproval rate to legislation would be a detail worth elaborating on, and yet...

This is where the Civil Rights Act was mentioned. No mention of opposition. However, it is the first mention of "The Treatment".

However, the more stark difference was North and South. Only one Southerner voted for the bill. The majority of Dem defections were in the Southern States. (They were still about 18 or so of them.)

You are technically correct. 78% of no votes were Democrats. However, the makeup was 67D-33R. 21 Dems voted against the bill, but 69% of Dems voted for the bill. Also, the final tally was 73-27.

Was this what you were trying to send?

Are you talking about the Healthcare bill that Sanders cosponsored? What did Frank say that was wrong. The fact you rightly mentioned Sanders cosponsored this bill does prove that sometimes the worst person you know can make a good point.

All he does is make it about himself. If he didn't, he would actually be able to work with folks to get things done. His legislative record says otherwise. When you do the things Frank has listed, you are making it about yourself.

What I literally said is in the screenshot. In a bill, you have to say how you are going to pay for it, not how you could pay for it.